Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/436,201

DIVIDER SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AN INTERNAL CABIN OF AN AIRCRAFT

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Feb 08, 2024
Examiner
DANGOL, ASHESH
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
The Boeing Company
OA Round
4 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
147 granted / 212 resolved
+17.3% vs TC avg
Strong +47% interview lift
Without
With
+47.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
258
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
56.0%
+16.0% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 212 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1, 3-8, 10-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sexton et al. (US 2018/0346123) in view of Kang et al. (US 2017/0089632) and Walton et al. (US 2016/0297525). Regarding claims 1 and 6-7, Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) a divider system/header assembly (200) configured to separate a first section/first class section (151) from a second section/ business class section (152) within an internal cabin of an aircraft (Para 0025), the divider system comprising: a support bracket/header rail (203) (Para 0029); and one or more branding panel (201, 202) secured to the support bracket (Para 0029); but it is silent about the divider system comprising: one or more branding panel as one or more displays, wherein the one or more displays show electronic content thereon, and wherein the one or more displays are selectively switchable between a transparent mode, opaque mode, and a semi-transparent mode based on phases of flight of the aircraft. Kang et al. ‘632 (figures 1-5) teaches a display device comprising a controller/control unit (251) driving a display driver (253) to display images on the display panel (220) wherein input (270) receive an image display mode/selectively switching of the display panel comprising a transparent mode, an opaque mode, a semi-transparent mode, an advertisement mode, a product information display mode etc. (Para 0165-0168). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Kang et al. ‘631 to configure the divider system comprising: one or more branding panel as one or more displays, wherein the one or more displays show electronic content thereon (display are used to show electronic contents), and wherein the one or more displays are selectively switchable between a transparent mode, opaque mode, and a semi-transparent mode based on phases of flight of the aircraft. One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance engagement through dynamic and interactive content. Modified Sexton et al. ‘123 is silent about the divider system comprising: the one or more displays extend downwardly from the support bracket, a fitting upwardly extending from the support bracket wherein the fitting is configured to secure the divider system to one or more of a stowage bin, a ceiling or a passenger service unit (PSU) within the internal cabin, and wherein the fitting is configured to removably secure the divider system to one or more of the stowage bin, the ceiling, or the PSU. Walton et al. ‘525 teaches (figures 1-5) a section divider assembly (200) within an internal cabin (202) of an aircraft (10) comprising header/support bracket (204) that securely retains a barrier/display (206) extending downwardly from the header (204) wherein header/support bracket (204) includes a panel (208) whose upper edge (214) includes an intermediate peak (220) that extends into a gap (222) between a stowage bin (224) and a PSU (226) and a connecting beam (320) extends upwardly from the intermediate peak (220) and conform to a curvature of an inboard edge (322) of a PSU (324) wherein the beam (320) connect to a bracket/fitting (326) and the bracket/fitting (326) is secured to the inboard rail (300) through the fasteners (314); and wherein the section divider assembly (200) is positioned in a desired position by removing the fasteners (314) and sliding the bracket/fitting (326) to the desired position (Para 0059-0060, 0066). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Walton et al. ‘525 to configure the divider system comprising: the one or more displays extend downwardly from the support bracket, a fitting upwardly extending from the support bracket wherein the fitting is configured to secure the divider system to a ceiling within the internal cabin (displays are directly below the ceiling (clearly seen in figure 2)), and wherein the fitting is configured to removably secure the divider system to the ceiling (bracket/fittings can be decoupled). One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would avoid tampering of the display as the attachment point will be right next to the ceiling. Regarding claim 3, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) wherein the one or more displays comprise a transparent digital display screen (as modified by Kang et al. ‘631; Para 0086 (LCD and OLED are types of digital display). Regarding claim 4, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) wherein the one or more displays comprise a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen (as modified by Kang et al. ‘631; Para 0086). Regarding claim 5, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) wherein the divider system is not configured to extend to a floor of the internal cabin (clearly seen in figure 2). Regarding claim 8, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) further comprising a control unit in communication with the one or more displays, wherein the control unit is configured to control operation of the one or more displays (as modified Kang et al. ‘632). Regarding claim 10, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) wherein the one or more displays comprises a single display (as modified by Kang et al. ‘632; either one or more branding panels can be a display). Regarding claim 11, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) wherein the one or more displays comprise: a first transparent display screen (as modified by Kang et al. ‘632); a second transparent display screen (as modified by Kang et al. ‘632); wherein the first transparent display screen and the second transparent display screen are oriented back-to-back in relation to one another (as modified by Kang et al. ‘632; either one or more branding panels can be a display; branding panels/ displays are next to each other facing in opposite directions), and wherein the electronic content shown on the first transparent display screen and the second transparent display screen is displayed same to individuals viewing from a first position and a second position opposite from the first position (displays are independent of each other which can display same electronic content). Regarding claims 12 and 14, Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) a method for a divider system/header assembly (200) configured to separate a first section/first class section (151) from a second section/ business class section (152) within an internal cabin of an aircraft (Para 0025), the divider system comprising: a support bracket/header rail (Para 0029); and one or more branding panel (203) (201, 202) secured to the support bracket (Para 0029); but it is silent about the divider system comprising: one or more branding panel as one or more displays, wherein the one or more displays show electronic content thereon, and wherein the one or more displays are selectively switchable between a transparent mode, an opaque mode, and a semi-transparent mode based on phases of flight of the aircraft the method comprising: showing the electronic content on the one or more displays; and selectively switching the one or more displays between the transparent mode, the opaque mode, and the semi-transparent mode based on the phases of flight of the aircraft. Kang et al. ‘632 (figures 1-5) teaches a display device comprising a controller/control unit (251) driving a display driver (253) to display images on the display panel (220) wherein input (270) receive an image display mode/selectively switching of the display panel comprising a transparent mode, an opaque mode, a semi-transparent mode, an advertisement mode, a product information display mode etc. (Para 0165-0168). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Kang et al. ‘632 to configure the divider system comprising: one or more branding panel as one or more displays (display are used to show electronic contents), wherein the one or more displays show electronic content thereon, and wherein the one or more displays are selectively switchable between a transparent mode, an opaque mode, and a semi-transparent mode based on phases of flight of the aircraft the method comprising: showing the electronic content on the one or more displays; and selectively switching the one or more displays between the transparent mode, the opaque mode, and the semi-transparent mode based on the phases of flight of the aircraft. One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance engagement through dynamic and interactive content. Modified Sexton et al. ‘123 is silent about the method comprising: the one or more displays extend downwardly from the support bracket, and removably securing the divider system to one or more of a stowage bin, a ceiling or a passenger service unit (PSU) within the internal cabin. Walton et al. ‘525 teaches (figures 1-5) a section divider assembly (200) within an internal cabin (202) of an aircraft (10) comprising header/support bracket (204) that securely retains a barrier/display (206) extending downwardly from the header (204) wherein header/support bracket (204) includes a panel (208) whose upper edge (214) includes an intermediate peak (220) that extends into a gap (222) between a stowage bin (224) and a PSU (226) and a connecting beam (320) extends upwardly from the intermediate peak (220) and conform to a curvature of an inboard edge (322) of a PSU (324) wherein the beam (320) connect to a bracket/fitting (326) and the bracket/fitting (326) is secured to the inboard rail (300) through the fasteners (314); and wherein the section divider assembly (200) is positioned in a desired position by removing the fasteners (314) and sliding the bracket/fitting (326) to the desired position (Para 0059-0060, 0066). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Walton et al. ‘525 to configure the divider system comprising: the one or more displays extend downwardly from the support bracket (displays are directly below the ceiling (clearly seen in figure 2)), and removably securing the divider system to a ceiling within the internal cabin (brackets/fitting can be decoupled). One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would avoid tampering of the display as the attachment point will be right next to the ceiling. Regarding claim 13, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the method wherein the one or more displays comprise a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen (as modified by Kang et al. ‘631; Para 0086). Regarding claim 15, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the method further comprising controlling, by a control unit in communication with the one or more displays, operation of the one or more displays (as modified Kang et al. ‘632). Regarding claims 16 and 18, Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) an aircraft (100) (Para 0025) comprising: an internal cabin/passenger cabin (100C) having a first section/first class section (151) and a second section/business class section (152) (Para 0025); and a divider system separating the first section from the second section; the divider section comprising: a support bracket/header rail (Para 0029); and one or more branding panel (201, 202) secured to the support bracket (Para 0029); but it is silent about the divider system comprising: one or more branding panel as one or more displays, wherein the one or more displays show electronic content thereon, and wherein the one or more displays are selectively switchable between a transparent mode, an opaque mode, and a semi-transparent mode based on phases of flight of the aircraft. Kang et al. ‘632 (figures 1-5) teaches a display device comprising a controller/control unit (251) driving a display driver (253) to display images on the display panel (220) wherein input (270) receive an image display mode/selectively switching of the display panel comprising a transparent mode, an opaque mode, a semi-transparent mode, an advertisement mode, a product information display mode etc. (Para 0165-0168). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Kang et al. ‘632 to configure the divider system comprising: one or more branding panel as one or more displays, wherein the one or more displays show electronic content thereon (display are used to show electronic contents), and wherein the one or more displays are selectively switchable between a transparent mode, an opaque mode, and a semi-transparent mode based on phases of flight of the aircraft. One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance engagement through dynamic and interactive content. Modified Sexton et al. ‘123 is silent about the divider system comprising: the one or more displays extend downwardly from the support bracket, and a fitting upwardly extending from the support bracket, wherein the fitting is configured to removably secure the divider system to one or more of a stowage bin, a ceiling or a passenger service unit (PSU) within the internal cabin. Walton et al. ‘525 teaches (figures 1-5) a section divider assembly (200) within an internal cabin (202) of an aircraft (10) comprising header/support bracket (204) that securely retains a barrier/display (206) extending downwardly from the header (204) wherein header/support bracket (204) includes a panel (208) whose upper edge (214) includes an intermediate peak (220) that extends into a gap (222) between a stowage bin (224) and a PSU (226) and a connecting beam (320) extends upwardly from the intermediate peak (220) and conform to a curvature of an inboard edge (322) of a PSU (324) wherein the beam (320) connect to a bracket/fitting (326) and the bracket/fitting (326) is secured to the inboard rail (300) through the fasteners (314); and wherein the section divider assembly (200) is positioned in a desired position by removing the fasteners (314) and sliding the bracket/fitting (326) to the desired position (Para 0059-0060, 0066). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Walton et al. ‘525 to configure the divider system comprising: the one or more displays extend downwardly from the support bracket, and a fitting upwardly extending from the support bracket, wherein the fitting is configured to removably secure the divider system to a ceiling within the internal cabin (brackets/fitting can be decoupled). One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would avoid tampering of the display as the attachment point will be right next to the ceiling. Regarding claim 17, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the aircraft wherein the one or more displays comprise a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen (as modified by Kang et al. ‘631; Para 0086). Regarding claim 20, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the aircraft wherein the one or more displays comprise: a first transparent display screen (as modified by Kang et al. ‘631); a second transparent display screen(as modified by Kang et al. ‘631); wherein the first transparent display screen and the second transparent display screen are oriented back-to-back in relation to one another (as modified by Kang et al. ‘631; either one or more branding panels can be a display; branding panels/ displays are next to each other facing in opposite directions), and wherein the first transparent display screen and the second transparent display screen are configured such that the electronic content shown on the first transparent display screen and the second transparent display screen is displayed same to individuals viewing from a first position and a second position opposite from the first position (displays are independent of each other and can be configured to display same electronic content). Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sexton et al. (US 2018/0346123), Kang et al. (US 2017/0089632) and Walton et al. (US 2016/0297525) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2017/0057638) and Thomas et al. (NPL). Regarding claim 2, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) of claim 1 but it is silent about the divider system wherein during boarding, the one or more displays present informative guidance. Chen et al. ‘638 teaches a passenger interaction screen provided and positioned for viewing by passengers boarding the aircraft through a door in the aircraft fuselage and passing through the galley into a passenger cabin, the screen adapted to display flight information relevant to passengers boarding the aircraft and to display selected (Para 0013). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Chen et al. ‘638 to configure the divider system wherein during boarding, the one or more displays present informative guidance. One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would assist passenger during boarding. Modified Sexton et al. ‘123 is silent about the divider system wherein during taxi, takeoff, and landing, the one or more displays are in the transparent mode to offer a direct, transparent view therethrough without impediment. Thomas et al. (NPL) teaches that the regulatory authorities require that each seat located in the passenger compartment and designated for use during takeoff and landing by cabin crew members provides an unobstructed/direct view of the passenger cabin area for which that crew member is responsible, and the direct view and passenger supervision by cabin crew members is of a critical importance of cabin safety wherein direct view means “visual contact with cabin main area/aisles which enables the flight attendant to be made aware of passenger needs relative to safety when the flight attendant is seated” which is also intended when the cabin crew member is harnessed (Pg. 1; cabin crew members are harnessed during taxiing, takeoff, landing, turbulences etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Thomas et al. (NPL) to configure the divider system wherein during taxi, takeoff, and landing, the one or more displays are in the transparent mode to offer a direct, transparent view therethrough without impediment (opaque and semi-transparent mode obstruct direct view). One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable cabin crew members to supervise passengers and monitor their behavior. Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sexton et al. (US 2018/0346123), Kang et al. (US 2017/0089632) and Walton et al. (US 2016/0297525) as applied to claims 1 and 16 above respectively, and further in view of Miller (US 2003/0052865). Regarding claim 9, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the divider system/header assembly (200) of claim 9 but it is silent about the divider system further comprising a user interface in communication with the control unit, wherein the user interface is configured to allow an individual to control operation of the one or more displays. Miller ‘865 teaches a system and method of providing a wallet-sized electronic display card made up of touch-sensitive color liquid crystal display (LCD), a memory, a display processor/control unit, power source and a selector/user interface for allowing a user to control the changing of the digital information displayed on the LCD (Para 0005). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Miller ‘865 to configure the divider system further comprising a user interface in communication with the control unit, wherein the user interface is configured to allow an individual to control operation of the one or more displays. One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to change the electronic content as needed. Regarding claim 19, modified Sexton et al. ‘123 teaches (figures 1-3C) the aircraft wherein the divider system further comprises: a control unit in communication with the one or more displays, wherein the control unit is configured to control operation of the one or more displays (as modified Kang et al. ‘632) but it is silent about the divider system further comprises: a user interface in communication with the control unit, wherein the user interface is configured to allow an individual to control operation of the one or more displays. Miller ‘865 teaches a system and method of providing a wallet-sized electronic display card made up of touch-sensitive color liquid crystal display (LCD), a memory, a display processor/control unit, power source and a selector/user interface for allowing a user to control the changing of the digital information displayed on the LCD (Para 0005). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sexton et al. ‘123 to incorporate the teachings of Miller ‘865 to configure the divider system further comprises: a user interface in communication with the control unit, wherein the user interface is configured to allow an individual to control operation of the one or more displays. One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to change the electronic content as needed. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 8th January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Sexton ‘123 teaches away from a transparent divider, however, combined teaching of Sexton ‘123 and Kang et al. ‘632, as explained in the rejection above, teaches a transparent divider without destroying the light blocking functionality of Sexton ‘123’s header assemblies, as modified Sexton ‘123 teaches display device comprising an opaque mode during which light is blocked by the display device. In response to applicant's argument with respect to Kang et al. ‘632, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Thus, one or more brandishing panels (201, 202) on a header assembly (200) of Sexton ‘123, and display device (253) of Kang et al. ‘632 are analogous as they both are used for displaying objects/information. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHESH DANGOL whose telephone number is (303)297-4455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0730-0530 MT. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua J Michener can be reached at (571) 272-1467. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ASHESH DANGOL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 08, 2024
Application Filed
May 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 24, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 01, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 08, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600469
PROPULSOR EXTERNAL HYDRAULIC CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600472
SEAPLANE WITH ATTACHABLE FLOAT FRAME COMPRISING AUXILIARY FUEL TANKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600470
VERTICAL TAKE-OFF AND LANDING AIRCRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589866
AIRCRAFT PROPULSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589861
MOVING OBJECT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+47.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 212 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month